Put in Context
Generic Defense Reaction
This can only defend an attack with 3 or less base {p}.
Average Card Type Distribution
Average Attack Value:Β
2.762.758085480
Average Defense Value: Β
2.662.657845339
Hero
Ira, Scarlet Revenger
418% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Ira, Scarlet Revenger that play both.
Enigma
23% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Enigma that play both.
living legend - Classic Constructed
Enigma, Ledger of Ancestry
19% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Enigma, Ledger of Ancestry that play both.
New
Tuffnut, Bumbling Hulkster
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Tuffnut, Bumbling Hulkster that play both.
Marlynn, Treasure Hunter
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Marlynn, Treasure Hunter that play both.
Scurv, Stowaway
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Scurv, Stowaway that play both.
Equipment
Fyendal's Spring Tunic
57% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Fyendal's Spring Tunic that play both.
Quickdodge Flexors
39% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Quickdodge Flexors that play both.
Traverse the Universe
39% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Traverse the Universe that play both.
Calming Gesture
37% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Calming Gesture that play both.
Silent Stilettos
28% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Silent Stilettos that play both.
Crown of Reflection
27% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Crown of Reflection that play both.
Nullrune Gloves
23% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Nullrune Gloves that play both.
Phantasmal Footsteps
18% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Phantasmal Footsteps that play both.
Meridian Pathway
18% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Meridian Pathway that play both.
Nullrune Hood
16% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Nullrune Hood that play both.
Tide Flippers
14% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Tide Flippers that play both.
Nullrune Boots
13% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Nullrune Boots that play both.
Crown of Providence
12% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Crown of Providence that play both.
Robe of Autumn's Fall
12% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Robe of Autumn's Fall that play both.
Mask of Momentum
11% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Mask of Momentum that play both.
Pouncing Paws
11% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Pouncing Paws that play both.
Okana Scar Wraps
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Okana Scar Wraps that play both.
Mage Master Boots
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Mage Master Boots that play both.
Gold-Baited Hook
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Gold-Baited Hook that play both.
Old Knocker
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Old Knocker that play both.
Braveforge Bracers
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Braveforge Bracers that play both.
Flick Knives
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Flick Knives that play both.
Blade Beckoner Gauntlets
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Blade Beckoner Gauntlets that play both.
Iris of the Blossom
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Iris of the Blossom that play both.
Blood Splattered Vest
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Blood Splattered Vest that play both.
Grains of Bloodspill
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Grains of Bloodspill that play both.
Tiger Stripe Shuko
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Tiger Stripe Shuko that play both.
Nullrune Robe
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Nullrune Robe that play both.
Refraction Bolters
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Refraction Bolters that play both.
Stonewall Gauntlet
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Stonewall Gauntlet that play both.
Kabuto of Imperial Authority
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Kabuto of Imperial Authority that play both.
Sealace Sarong
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Sealace Sarong that play both.
Valiant Dynamo
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Valiant Dynamo that play both.
Weapon
living legend - Classic Constructed
Cosmo, Scroll of Ancestral Tapestry
37% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Cosmo, Scroll of Ancestral Tapestry that play both.
Harmonized Kodachi
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Harmonized Kodachi that play both.
Hammerhead, Harpoon Cannon
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Hammerhead, Harpoon Cannon that play both.
Obsidian Fire Vein
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Obsidian Fire Vein that play both.
Action
Rage Specter
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
34% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Rage Specter that play both.
Restless Coalescence
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Restless Coalescence that play both.
Warmonger's Diplomacy
Avg. played: Β
2.842.838125666
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Warmonger's Diplomacy that play both.
Astral Etchings (Red)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
28% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Astral Etchings (Red) that play both.
Spectral Manifestations (Red)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
23% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Spectral Manifestations (Red) that play both.
Truce
Avg. played: Β
2.792.788401254
21% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Truce that play both.
The Weakest Link
Avg. played: Β
2.662.656250000
20% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and The Weakest Link that play both.
This Round's on Me
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
12% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and This Round's on Me that play both.
Dual Threat
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Dual Threat that play both.
Portside Exchange
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Portside Exchange that play both.
10,000 Year Reunion
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and 10,000 Year Reunion that play both.
Up Sticks and Run (Red)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Up Sticks and Run (Red) that play both.
Trot Along
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Trot Along that play both.
Rowdy Locals
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Rowdy Locals that play both.
Sea Floor Salvage
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Sea Floor Salvage that play both.
Cog in the Machine
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Cog in the Machine that play both.
Essence of Ancestry: Body
Avg. played: Β
2.482.483870968
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Essence of Ancestry: Body that play both.
Hit and Run (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Hit and Run (Blue) that play both.
Sift (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Sift (Blue) that play both.
Essence of Ancestry: Mind
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Essence of Ancestry: Mind that play both.
Attack Action
Command and Conquer
Avg. played: Β
2.912.914951989
56% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Command and Conquer that play both.
Levels of Enlightenment
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
38% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Levels of Enlightenment that play both.
Phantasmaclasm
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Phantasmaclasm that play both.
Miraging Metamorph
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
28% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Miraging Metamorph that play both.
Enlightened Strike
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
25% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Enlightened Strike that play both.
Enigma Chimera (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
21% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Enigma Chimera (Blue) that play both.
Ripple Away
Avg. played: Β
2.722.723228995
18% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Ripple Away that play both.
Erase Face
Avg. played: Β
2.682.680620155
18% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Erase Face that play both.
Second Tenet of Chi: Wind
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
14% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Second Tenet of Chi: Wind that play both.
Spectral Prowler (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.692.688524590
14% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Spectral Prowler (Blue) that play both.
Sirens of Safe Harbor (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.672.666666667
12% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Sirens of Safe Harbor (Red) that play both.
Fearless Confrontation
Avg. played: Β
2.252.250000000
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Fearless Confrontation that play both.
Enact Vengeance
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Enact Vengeance that play both.
Seek Vengeance
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Seek Vengeance that play both.
Seek Vengeance (Red)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Seek Vengeance (Red) that play both.
Vengeance Never Rests
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Vengeance Never Rests that play both.
Sea Legs
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Sea Legs that play both.
Bittering Thorns (Red)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Bittering Thorns (Red) that play both.
Cut Through (Red)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Cut Through (Red) that play both.
Censor
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Censor that play both.
Blue Fin Harpoon
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Blue Fin Harpoon that play both.
King Shark Harpoon
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and King Shark Harpoon that play both.
Red Fin Harpoon
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Red Fin Harpoon that play both.
Yellow Fin Harpoon
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Yellow Fin Harpoon that play both.
Spears of Surreality (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Spears of Surreality (Blue) that play both.
Sound the Alarm
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Sound the Alarm that play both.
Pain in the Backside
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Pain in the Backside that play both.
Scar for a Scar (Red)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Scar for a Scar (Red) that play both.
Spears of Surreality (Red)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Spears of Surreality (Red) that play both.
Cosmic Awakening
Avg. played: Β
1.991.993055556
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Cosmic Awakening that play both.
Pick Up the Point (Red)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Pick Up the Point (Red) that play both.
King Kraken Harpoon
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and King Kraken Harpoon that play both.
Conqueror of the High Seas
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Conqueror of the High Seas that play both.
Murderous Rabble
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Murderous Rabble that play both.
Golden Tipple (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Golden Tipple (Blue) that play both.
Stab Wound
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Stab Wound that play both.
Attack Reaction
Legacy of Ikaru
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
15% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Legacy of Ikaru that play both.
Glint the Quicksilver
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Glint the Quicksilver that play both.
Provoke
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Provoke that play both.
Nip at the Heels
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Nip at the Heels that play both.
Blade Flurry
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Blade Flurry that play both.
Pummel (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Pummel (Red) that play both.
Defense Reaction
Sink Below (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.832.831210191
65% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Sink Below (Red) that play both.
Shelter from the Storm
Avg. played: Β
2.862.856481481
46% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Shelter from the Storm that play both.
Fate Foreseen
Avg. played: Β
2.762.758445946
37% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Fate Foreseen that play both.
That All You Got?
Avg. played: Β
2.662.655172414
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and That All You Got? that play both.
Wax On (Red)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Wax On (Red) that play both.
Block
Sunken Treasure
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
11% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Sunken Treasure that play both.
Fiddler's Green (Red)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Fiddler's Green (Red) that play both.
On the Horizon (Red)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and On the Horizon (Red) that play both.
Instant
Homage to Ancestors
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
46% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Homage to Ancestors that play both.
Rising Sun, Setting Moon
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
46% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Rising Sun, Setting Moon that play both.
Preserve Tradition
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
46% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Preserve Tradition that play both.
Pass Over
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
45% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Pass Over that play both.
Stir the Pot
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
44% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Stir the Pot that play both.
A Drop in the Ocean
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
42% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and A Drop in the Ocean that play both.
Sacred Art: Immortal Lunar Shrine
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
39% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Sacred Art: Immortal Lunar Shrine that play both.
Path Well Traveled
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
37% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Path Well Traveled that play both.
Manifestation of Miragai
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
35% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Manifestation of Miragai that play both.
The Grain that Tips the Scale
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
30% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and The Grain that Tips the Scale that play both.
Waxing Specter (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.612.608490566
16% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Waxing Specter (Red) that play both.
Waning Vengeance (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.582.582867784
13% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Waning Vengeance (Red) that play both.
Count Your Blessings (Red)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
13% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Count Your Blessings (Red) that play both.
Count Your Blessings (Yellow)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
13% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Count Your Blessings (Yellow) that play both.
Sigil of Solace (Red)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Sigil of Solace (Red) that play both.
Oasis Respite (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.602.598853868
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Oasis Respite (Red) that play both.
Arcane Compliance
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Arcane Compliance that play both.
Snag
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Snag that play both.
Calming Breeze
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Calming Breeze that play both.
Dense Blue Mist
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Dense Blue Mist that play both.
Resource
Riches of TrΕpal-Dhani
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
11% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Put in Context and Riches of TrΕpal-Dhani that play both.
